2495 Humphrey/DEFRA: I can't overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the Government can give on climate change to help them tell their story. They want the story to be a very strong one and don't want to be made to look foolish.

1885 Phil Jones struggles with Excel and statistics. Bob Ward offers to help with a rebuttal to David Whitehouse (GWPF)

3755.txt "It is really important that you don't just copy or reproduce any bits because it is not my proposal and it would be a court case in theory if a similarity was noticed." "but for GODS SAKE please respect the sensitivity here and destroy the file immediately when finished and please do not tell ANYBODY I sent this. Cheers Keith"

<1788> Jones: There shouldn’t be someone else at UEA with different views [from "recent extreme weather is due to global warming"] – at least not a climatologist.

<5111> Pollack: But it will be very difficult to make the MWP go away in Greenland.

<2733> Crowley: Phil, thanks for your thoughts – guarantee there will be no dirty laundry in the open.

<2095> Steig: He’s skeptical that the warming is as great as we show in East Antarctica — he thinks the “right” answer is more like our detrended results in the supplementary text. I cannot argue he is wrong.

<0953> Jones: This will reduce the 1940-1970 cooling in NH temps. Explaining the cooling withsulphates won’t be quite as necessary.

<4944> Haimberger: It is interesting to see the lower tropospheric warming minimum in the tropicsin all three plots, which I cannot explain. I believe it is spurious but it is remarkably robust against my adjustment efforts.

<4165> Jones: what he [Zwiers] has done comes to a different conclusion than Caspar and Gene! I reckon this can be saved by careful wording

<0999> Hulme: My work is as Director of the national centre for climate change research, a job which requires me to translate my Christian belief about stewardship of God’s planet into research and action.

0810 Mann: I gave up on Judith Curry a while ago. I don’t know what she think’s she’s doing, but its not helping the cause

4184: Jones: [to Hansen] Keep up the good work! [...] Even though it’s been a mild winter in the UK, much of the rest of the world seems coolish – expected though given the La Nina. Roll on the next El Nino!

5066: Hegerl: [IPCC AR5 models] So using the 20th c for tuning is just doing what some people have long suspected us of doing [...] and what the nonpublished diagram from NCAR showing correlation between aerosol forcing and sensitivity also suggested.

3755: “It is really important that you don’t just copy or reproduce any bits because it is not my proposal and it would be a court case in theory if a similarity was noticed.” “but for GODS SAKE please respect the sensitivity here and destroy the file immediately when finished and please do not tell ANYBODY I sent this. Cheers Keith”

0850: Barnett: [IPCC AR5 models] clearly, some tuning or very good luck involved. I doubt the modeling world will be able to get away with this much longer

3935: BBC's Roger Harrabin is on advisory board at Tyndall. This must have affected his independence re reporting of Climategate I.

2775: Jones (CRU) says choosing temperature records so as to show warming.

3373: Bradley says Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year 'reconstruction'.

4241: Wilson: "I thought I’d play around with some randomly generated time-series and see if I could ‘reconstruct’ northern hemisphere temperatures. [...] The reconstructions clearly show a ‘hockey-stick’ trend. I guess this is precisely the phenomenon that Macintyre has been going on about." This shows that at least one mainstream climatologist knew the Hockey Stick was wrong and McIntyre was right.

4758: Osborn speaking of throwing out lots of tree ring data on the hide the decline series because it doesn't track temperature. Meanwhile they are criticising another clmiatologist for doing the same thing.

4693 Crowley: I am not convinced that the “truth” is always worth reaching if it is at thecost of damaged personal relationships

???? Jones (?) UEA does not hold the very vast majority of mine [potentially FOIable emails] anyway which I copied onto private storage after the completion of the IPCC task.

???? Jones: I’ve been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process

1577: Jones: [FOI, temperature data] Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get - and has to be well hidden. I've discussed this with the main funder (US Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.

1682: What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably [...]

5349: discussion of getting Lord May or Lord Oxburgh to deal with communication with industry. Kelly mentioned too.

<3655> Singer/WWF: we as an NGO working on climate policy need such a document pretty soon for thepublic and for informed decision makers in order to get a) a debate started and b) in order to get into the media the context between climate extremes/desasters/costs and finally the link between weather extremes and energy

<1939> Thorne/MetO: Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary [...]

3969: "I've pointed everyone to the press release, and have chatted with only one person, a guy from the BBC. He seemed very informed and clever. The only point I didn't like was that he kept trying to get me to say what I think the skeptics will think - I kept telling him I don't know, but he obviously wanted more. Anyway, I hope you don't mind that I suggested he could chat with you if needed. His name and email are: Richard Black,"

0058 Briffa tells physics prof to delete email since it might become subject to FOI.

3890 refers to "sneaking papers into AR4 after the deadline". Doesn't make sense to me.

References (2)

Index of /climategate2/FOIA/. Have fun! Update - posted at at Bishop Hil l I cracked the passcode for the rest of the emails: "4x00y312dym!231@4" Enjoy! No way to confirm from here. Perhaps others can....

Reader Comments (59)

3757.txtJ Smith to M Hulme

Dear Mike

We are writing to some alumni of the University of Cambridge Media andEnvironment seminars gathering ideas for the BBC's coverage of the Rio+10Earth Summit in a year's time. Before the Rio summit, the BBC held the OneWorld festival, which included some memorable broadcasting - particularly afeature drama on refugees. Some broadcasting is already in the pipeline thatwill relate to the themes of Rio+ 10, but this is an open opportunity foryou to put forward ideas that will be collated and circulated amongstrelevant BBC decision-makers.

* What should the BBC be doing this time in terms of news, currentaffairs, drama, documentaries, game shows, music etc? * How can the BBC convey the theme of sustainable development toviewers and listeners who have probably seen all the issues raised before?* Is there any scope for a global broadcasting initiative?* What are the strongest themes and specific issues that should appearin the media in the months and years following the conference?

If you have thoughts, please send your reply both to this email and copy toharrabin1@aol.com. We will also draw on the information gathered in planninga new three year programme of media seminars.

Do not expect the BBC to investigate the latest climategate2 email dump. They will attempt to cover it up and whitewash it though. the BBC science and news departments are entirely corrupted and bought and paid for by the alarmist lobby.

Thanks so much for this Bish. I've had much else to focus on since the excitement of this morning with tallbloke. How cool to open my laptop in the oldest riverside pub in London - now with wireless - at the end of the day and see this.

A journalist I know who is involved in climate and science issues is well trained enough to have already rationalized dimissing the e-mails and seems to have no interest in finding out more. It is apparently too unprofessional to use leaked docs. Meanwhile his newspaper is pursuing multiple sotries in any given week using leaked docs and depends explicitly on anonymous insiders giving them tips.The devolution of the media into a tame lap dog is sad to watch.

204. Confidential minutes of the Russell panel’s interviews of key members of UEA staff have recently been published – perhaps inadvertently – on the inquiry website. These reveal that the panel were informed by UEA IT staff that Briffa had taken steps that might be construed as an attempt to block Freedom of Information requests. On 18 December 2009, at the very start of the inquiry, Muir Russell met with Jonathan Colam-French, UEA’s Director of Information Services and other members of the UEA IT team. The minutes record two statements made by Colam-French during this meeting:“JCF – full CRU data set held electronically can be made available and can be accessible. However, part of it may not be electronic. Working data, emails, more transitory working information – may be stored in other locations.”“JCF – For example Keith Briffa took home emails that were subject to FOI to en- sure their safekeeping.”117 [Emphasis added]205. It is not clear why Keith Briffa thought that taking home emails would make them safe. At UEA they would presumably have been backed up and therefore much more secure than elsewhere. It is probable that Briffa took these steps in the wake of Jones’ request that he delete emails relating to the Fourth Assessment Re- port. Briffa would probably have been aware that compliance with Jones’ request would have been a criminal offence under the Freedom of Information Act. He may therefore have thought that by taking the emails home, he would be able to tell Jones that he had complied while still avoiding a breach of the Act.206. These questions are of critical importance in understanding what took place at the CRU in the wake of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report. Yet despite this, there is no discussion of Briffa’s actions or their meaning in the report.

No warming? How can I spin that? Thanks for responding so comprehensively. I have plotted the data before, and as you observe, the trend is up but the result isn't statistically significant, which I think makes it open to attack. I think the problem is that NOAA made the following statement in its report on the 2006 data:

"However, uncertainties in the global calculations due largely to gaps in data coverage make 2006 statistically indistinguishable from 2005 and several other recent warm years as shown by the error bars on the [1]global time series."

I'm not sure how to argue against this point - it appears to imply that there is no statistically significant trend in the global temperature record over the past few years.

I'm still wondering what these emails have got to do with me. I appreciate number 1794 though "Bishop Hill" described as blog "that spreads misinformation about climate science" I trust His Grace will be calling in Messrs Sue Grabbit and Run.:-)

Re - Harrabin and 3757 - just because he was on the board doesn't mean that his reporting was affected. I thought that, in the end, he was sharply critical of East Anglia - remember his interview with Phil Willis - especially within his employment. He (with Pearce and initially Monbiot) was one of the few greens to take exception to Climategate and to at least somewhat resist the Empire Strikes back phase.

I should point out that in this time frame Bob Ward is working for Risk Management Solutions (www.rms.com). Who of course have a vested interest in fanning the flames of CAGW. Our Phil is helping on the bellows: 2063.txt from Phil,

I'm attaching the draft paper that many of us are planning to submit at some stage fairly soon. It is terribly late, but we will submit it. So the attached is just for you !! I know you'll respect this plea. All you need to look at is the abstract,

Newsnight, questions put to Mann with recorded response along the lines of scientists sometimes have to get involved with policy.Overall assessment that three inquiries have cleared British scientists of any wrong doing and police have a new lead on the source by forensically analyzing the message in the readme file?????

You got it just about right. However you forgot to predict that they'd interview Michael Mann and have him say that it was all unjustified attacks against poor innocent scientists. All this against a background of collapsing icebergs. She forgot to ask Prof. Mann aboutif she could apply for the job investigating Steve McIntyre.

Here we have the impartial scientist PhilJones loading up a press release with as much warmist "facts" as he can find.

Nearer the Dec 13 release date can someone check the CET series. I know we've had a warm start to December and we're only at the 6th, but if it continues at say an anomaly of about 2 deg C above 1961-90, the year would just creep into being second warmest in the CET series behind 2006. 2007 won't break 2006's record, but a statement that we've just had the warmest 2 years in the entire 349 year CET series would be good to add to the UK sentence I've added. This would need checking on the 12th and looking at the 10-day forecast at that point.

" It is interesting to see the lower tropospheric warming minimum in the tropicsin all three plots, which I cannot explain. I believe it is spurious but it is remarkably robust against my adjustment efforts."

Just listened to Richard Black on the World Service a few moments ago (22/11/11). He & the interviewer implied it's all a plot on the part of the sceptics. They also said that the developing nations are some of the most vocal in demanding a green agenda. Well, of course they are, especially if they're developing nations governed by a ruling class or dictator who likes the steady income the global warming industry provides for them from the pockets of taxpayers in the developed world. The whole interview could not have been more biased or partial. How does the BBC get away with this?

Jones: There shouldn’t be someone else at UEA with different views [from "recent extreme weather is due to global warming"] – at least not a climatologist.

This is probably what I find most infuriating. Substantial disagreements in private but for the sake of cause it must not become public.

The Cambridge Media and Environment Programme is a difficult beast to track down. Courtesy of one of the emails I have noted a web address for it. Web Archive has a very old copy of the page with some brief details of what they were getting up to pre-2000.

I'm not sure that these add much to what we already understood about the personalities at the heart of climate science, but even so I can't help but revel in the chance to eavesdrop on the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring.

Personally I think that the impending financial/political armageddon will put the whole matter off the radar for a good few years: reality tends to help concentrate minds on what's really important.

Newsnight, questions put to Mann with recorded response along the lines of scientists sometimes have to get involved with policy.

Overall assessment that three inquiries have cleared British scientists of any wrong doing and police have a new lead on the source by forensically analyzing the message in the readme file????? [emphasis added -hro]

And such "forensic analysis" is no doubt sure to be so much more helpful than any requests to the beneficiaries for the IP address(es) of the poster(s) who dropped the messages!

One wonders how much more they hope to get out of this particular file than they've evidently been able to get from anything else in the last two years!

22 Nov: Economist: Carbon controlThis house believes that climate-control policies cannot rely on carbon capture and storageJoin this Live DebateDefending the motion: Joseph RommOpening Remarks: Joseph RommAny debate over climate policies must begin with the scope of the problem and solution…Needless to say, anything close to 6°C warming this century would probably mean suffering beyond imagination for billions:• devastating heat waves, floods and other extreme events;• myriad direct health impacts;• dust-bowl conditions over much of the arable and heavily populated regions around the globe;• sea-level rise of around 1 foot by 2050, then 4-6 feet (or more) by 2100, rising some 6-12 inches (or more) each decade thereafter;• massive species loss on land and sea—perhaps 50% or more of all biodiversity;• food insecurity—the increasingly difficulty task of feeding 7 billion, then 8 billion, then 9 billion people in a world with an ever-worsening climate.Most of these will be happening simultaneously and getting worse decade after decade. Equally tragic, a 2009 study found that the worst impacts would be ““largely irreversible for 1,000 years.”..http://www.economist.com/debate/days/view/781

22 Nov: Reuters: "Carbon" becomes dirty word for climate investorsIn a sign of the tough times facing the carbon sector, the Carbon Markets and Investors' Association last month dropped the word "carbon" from its name.The group, which represents more than 50 firms that finance and invest in emissions reduction, is now the Climate Markets and Investors' Association (CMIA)..."We need to explore supplementary routes to drive investments."The VCS Association, which manages a voluntary carbon offset standard, stopped spelling out the word "carbon" in its name last year."We never really thought twice about moving away from the word 'carbon'," said VCS Chief Executive David Antonioli."Carbon trading in particular does not have the best reputation so if you want to stay in this space but draw less ire from some quarters it would make sense to use climate instead of carbon."...http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-carbon-climate-idUSTRE7AL1GE20111122

"???? Jones (?) UEA does not hold the very vast majority of mine [potentially FOIable emails] anyway which I copied onto private storage after the completion of the IPCC task."

With the first release I had a passing thought that the file was a collection of emails and code/comments that were hidden away from FOIA eyes. Maybe an obscure UEA server was Phil Jones idea of private storage. Ho Hum. :)

1682: What if climate change appears to be just mainly a multidecadal natural fluctuation? They’ll kill us probably [...]

The latest draft report by the IPCC on extreme weather events which suggests that it will be difficult to discern any warming signal during the course of the next 20 to 30 years is coming close to accepting that all of this is (and was) nothing more than "multidecadal natural fluctuation."

If only it were possible to sue the cAWG promoters for recompense to cover the billions lost to the economies of the developed world and consequential loss of jobs. More the pity that there is no such effective recourse.

RayG -Mr Tuppen's nom de clavier was mentioned here at BH a few months ago. He had submitted a request to UEA for Paul Dennis's emails to Stephen McIntyre, "Jeff Id", and others. [It seems likely, based on the selection of correspondents, that Tuppen suspected Dr Dennis of being the source of the Climategate emails.]

Paul Dennis had the memorable, if unMannly, response of "you're welcome to my emails!" (or words to that effect).